You know what's almost as funny? One, this is after some pretty hefty nerfs to the class, and two, the Lock class is still the third least represented.

I feel bad for Blizzard; so much effort into revamping Locks so that people would play them and yet only a +2% population increase. They're probably sitting their scratching their heads wondering "how the heck do we get people to play locks, make them poop rainbows as they walk or something?".

You know what's almost as funny? One, this is after some pretty hefty nerfs to the class, and two, the Lock class is still the third least represented.

I feel bad for Blizzard; so much effort into revamping Locks so that people would play them and yet only a +2% population increase. They're probably sitting their scratching their heads wondering "how the heck do we get people to play locks, make them poop rainbows as they walk or something?".

Warlock is sooooooooooooooooo boring though, i'm sure they're fun at max level but I can't for the life of me level one. I just hate pet classes, and I'm sure a lot of the population does as well, but I've never had a problem playing a hunter because they're fun at low levels, you get a bow, multishot and disengage which is awesome and fun in low level dungeons (ability bloat fucks them later though). Warlocks don't get their cool shit until later so you're stuck doing shit dps in dungeons with your little dots and your stupid imp pet.

Problem with Warlock representation is that they are quite similar to mages and the ordinary casual player prefers playing a mage. Mages/Wizards/whatever are typical RPG class like Warriors and therefore have the highest representation.

In Raids though Warlocks are represented a lot more than mages because blizzard trys make people play locks instead of mages by making them borderline OP while Mages are rather underpowered since TBC.

The problem is that "the 99%" who play casual wow dont care if warlocks do 10% more DMG than Mages while in raids it leads to benching mages for warlock alts but thats only 1% of the population so it doesnt make a difference.

Problem with Warlock representation is that they are quite similar to mages and the ordinary casual player prefers playing a mage. Mages/Wizards/whatever are typical RPG class like Warriors and therefore have the highest representation.

In Raids though Warlocks are represented a lot more than mages because blizzard trys make people play locks instead of mages by making them borderline OP while Mages are rather underpowered since TBC.

The problem is that "the 99%" who play casual wow dont care if warlocks do 10% more DMG than Mages while in raids it leads to benching mages for warlock alts but thats only 1% of the population so it doesnt make a difference.

For me the problem is I don't have fun watching timers and procs and calculating the optimal time to refresh them, which is what you do as a Warlock. Even Destruction, which only has a single DoT to watch, feels more like playing a game of math than actually using spells to destroy something; you still have to watch procs to know when to refresh Immolate or use Chaos Bolt, when to Havoc (and what), when to use FnB, etc. and I don't find that fun at all. If it was much more streamlined, say you only ever use Chaos Bolt when you have X embers (or better yet make Embers like Combo Points), with a passive that allows such and such frequent ability to refresh Immolate automatically (like Chaos Bolt, for example), etc. it would be more interesting but then you wouldn't have the "skill gap" that so many people love.

For me the problem is I don't have fun watching timers and procs and calculating the optimal time to refresh them, which is what you do as a Warlock. Even Destruction, which only has a single DoT to watch, feels more like playing a game of math than actually using spells to destroy something; you still have to watch procs to know when to refresh Immolate or use Chaos Bolt, when to Havoc (and what), when to use FnB, etc. and I don't find that fun at all. If it was much more streamlined, say you only ever use Chaos Bolt when you have X embers (or better yet make Embers like Combo Points), with a passive that allows such and such frequent ability to refresh Immolate automatically (like Chaos Bolt, for example), etc. it would be more interesting but then you wouldn't have the "skill gap" that so many people love.

I don't know to which extend this game really needs to go back to two button specs. I mean destruction is incredibly easy to play on a basic level which will provide sufficient performance for easily 90% of the population. Also if the hardest hitting spell in the game doesn't give you the impression of destroying stuff I don't really see anything else that could. Ok, one the hardest hitting spells.

I don't know to which extend this game really needs to go back to two button specs. I mean destruction is incredibly easy to play on a basic level which will provide sufficient performance for easily 90% of the population. Also if the hardest hitting spell in the game doesn't give you the impression of destroying stuff I don't really see anything else that could.

To each their own I enjoyed simplistic specs much more than what we have now. I dusted off my Warlock to try Destro and while it's easy to play at the bare basics, it's not very good play to do so, so I constantly felt like I wasn't performing at even below average efficiency. That's fine though, as I very rarely play my Warlock anyways (and that's partially why).

Why do you post if you dont have anything to say? I dont get it why people on this forum browse around just to quote something and give a 5-word answer like "lol thats not true, derp" without contributing anything to the discussion.

I say warlocks have low representation classwise - which is true go on any census or statistics website.
I say that warlocks have high representation in raids - which is true go check the roster of any decent heroic raiding guild.
I say warlocks and mages are quite similar and people tend to rather play a mage because its to more iconic caster class - which is true.
I say blizzard trys to push warlock numbers and lower mage numbers since tbc - which is true... mages were garbage throughout whole of tbc while lock were OP, in wotlk they were quite equal, in cata warlocks weren't OP but always slightly ahead of mages until DS and in MoP locks are dominating the whole xpac.. Mages were ahead for very short terms for example at the end of T14 or at the end of T15, mostly when content was clear and it didnt matter anyway. AND IM NOT TALKING ABOUT ****ing PVP! Nobody cares about it anymore... if you think mages were always OP just because you got owned by frostmages in PVP the last few years, then cry somewhere else.

Then you come here and say "heeeerp do you even know what you're talking about derp???" without any more information?

Go ahead, show me the statistics where the WL-Population is higher than mage. Show me the rosters of good raiding guilds with more mages than warlocks. Tell me about all the times when Warlocks were underpowered. Tell me about progression times where mages were better than warlocks.

Why do you post if you dont have anything to say? I dont get it why people on this forum browse around just to quote something and give a 5-word answer like "lol thats not true, derp" without contributing anything to the discussion.

Usually people consider it not even worth the argument when people say such outlandish things as mages were underpowered TBC onwards.

Mages practically ruled wrath alongside legendary wielders. They had a hiccup in 4.0 but were straight back up there in 4.1 and being unbeaten the rest of the expansion. In MoP They've had a strong spec (top 5) every patch, but not as strong as warlocks who tend to hold 2-3 of those top 5 spots including no.1.

Originally Posted by Endus

which is kind of like saying "of COURSE you can't see the unicorns, unicorns are invisible, silly."

The reason isn't overall damage for me though.
The reason is the number of options open to warlocks for means of dealing damage.

With the number of play options open to warlocks through changing specs, talents and glyphs they can almost always make sure that they are able to deal damage in a useful way.

A perfect recent example of this is Ra-Den. Destro locks were brilliant for this fight. Their overall damage on the fight wasn't particularly great, and most certainly wasn't considered by anyone to be OP. What was great was their damage on orbs, the most important targets in the fight.

Another example where the overall damage was exceptional would be Lei Shen, where the aoe burst of demo locks made them perfect for destroying ball lightning. This huge aoe damage made their overall damage very high.

This is why warlocks are a great addition to a raid, they can change their damage distribution between sustained, burst, single target, multi dot and full on aoe and still be good at all of them.

It's not that warlocks are top of the pack in every type of combat scenario, it's that there is always a warlock spec that is above average.

Oh yeah and warlocks have really good survivability options in case the rest wasn't enough.

Why do you post if you dont have anything to say? I dont get it why people on this forum browse around just to quote something and give a 5-word answer like "lol thats not true, derp" without contributing anything to the discussion.

I say warlocks have low representation classwise - which is true go on any census or statistics website.
I say that warlocks have high representation in raids - which is true go check the roster of any decent heroic raiding guild.
I say warlocks and mages are quite similar and people tend to rather play a mage because its to more iconic caster class - which is true.
I say blizzard trys to push warlock numbers and lower mage numbers since tbc - which is true... mages were garbage throughout whole of tbc while lock were OP, in wotlk they were quite equal, in cata warlocks weren't OP but always slightly ahead of mages until DS and in MoP locks are dominating the whole xpac.. Mages were ahead for very short terms for example at the end of T14 or at the end of T15, mostly when content was clear and it didnt matter anyway. AND IM NOT TALKING ABOUT ****ing PVP! Nobody cares about it anymore... if you think mages were always OP just because you got owned by frostmages in PVP the last few years, then cry somewhere else.

Then you come here and say "heeeerp do you even know what you're talking about derp???" without any more information?

Go ahead, show me the statistics where the WL-Population is higher than mage. Show me the rosters of good raiding guilds with more mages than warlocks. Tell me about all the times when Warlocks were underpowered. Tell me about progression times where mages were better than warlocks.

But at least you posted something on a internet forum.

It's not my job to call you out on some of the most ridiculous statements I have ever read, i'm hoping that by commenting you'd actually come to your senses and edit out the statements that are completely false. But i'll do it for you anyway.

Plus you didn't even say half of what you just said in your original post.

Problem with Warlock representation is that they are quite similar to mages and the ordinary casual player prefers playing a mage. Mages/Wizards/whatever are typical RPG class like Warriors and therefore have the highest representation.

False. Warlocks and Mages are both typical RPG classes. It's just that people have preferences.

In Raids though Warlocks are represented a lot more than mages because blizzard trys make people play locks instead of mages by making them borderline OP while Mages are rather underpowered since TBC.

Warlocks are more represented because they bring great dps and a substantial amount of utility. Mages are fine and have been fine for years now. Why bother taking a mage when you can have a gateway, healthstones, be much tankier, bring the same amount of dps, provide spellpower AND stamina (two things that all classes benefit greatly from)

The problem is that "the 99%" who play casual wow dont care if warlocks do 10% more DMG than Mages while in raids it leads to benching mages for warlock alts but thats only 1% of the population so it doesnt make a difference.

It's rare that any guild bench a mage for a warlock, If anything they bench another class.